Chinese spacecraft lands on moon

[Don1]

LOL... it is BECAUSE IRBM tech and weapons are so critical & destabilizing in geo-politics that it has been limited...yuh ah eediat?? Yuh tink it ban cause it irrelevant???? LOL!!

Man get introduced to a term do a quick intanet search, quote Wikipedia an' believe im ready fi lecture....mi belly!!!!!!!!!!

[Muadib]

there are no experts to take up a complaint with..

no 'expert' has stated that China has surpassed or will surpass the USA in 20 years in Critical Aerospace technology..

You have read some assessment of China strategic IRBM development and attempted to twist it as an indicator of Chinese having surpassed the USA in critial Aerospace technology..

Is like me stap mek bow and arrow after mi sign peace treaty wid Geronimo and start mek gun.. and yuh learn fi mek bow and arrow and start improve pon di design.. den claim seh yuh surpass me in critical weapons technology...

lol ! woiee ! mi cranium !

Gwaan DonZero.. tuh di whiirrl !

[Don1]

LOL...yuh ah prove mi point an nuh realize it.

Again tek up yuh complaints wid di expert dem yuteman...ah fi dem papah

[Muadib]

China does not have 'the most advanced IRBM technologies in existence' as you put it because of Technological Superiority.. dem have it because di USA stap develop dat and stap mek dem..and may never based on TREATY obligations and cost benefit analysis of that technology.. eediat..

That is not surpassing anyone in 'critical Aerospace Technology'.. you clearly have a comprehension problem.. maybe the subject matter too advance fi yuh..

If this is what you have going fi yuh to support your bizarre statement.. bwoy. yuh cornah dark.. it is very poor choice.. picking slim I understand but next time do more research..

The USA is not competing with China in this technology so neither you nor China or your 'experts' have a basis to compare who is surpassing who.. and it certainly is not CRITICAL aerospace technology..

lol ! woiee !

Please tell me this is not all you have...

[Don1]

LOL!!! Man ah quote Wikipedia fi try refute tech experts published analysis...mi belly!!

Yuteman technology "potential" is useless unless its built & deployed. If it remains in the lab it remains as mere knowledge..NOT usable technology

For example (and to further your education) the Soviet Union first developed the theoretical basis for stealth technology and all the significant mathematical equations and algorithms which govern how to dissipate & defeat radar energy by material shaping. They did nothing with it except to write scientific papers.. the United States stole the information and devoted 10s of $Billions to create aircraft using those design rules which they were previously totally unable to work out on their own.

That is an important lesson in technology..he who knows is a good professor...but he who builds is a better engineer

The fact remains that regardless of reason China has the most advanced IRBM technologies in existence...until some other nation deploys a superior system

Now run along lika nice likkle student an rejoice inna yuh new found basic knowledge of this matter courtesy of Don di Teacha.... woooieee

[Muadib]

Tek it up with Rand:

RAND Corporation (Research ANd Development[2]) is a nonprofit global policy think tank first formed to offer research and analysis to the United States armed forces by Douglas Aircraft Company.

US Strategy and the Future of the INF Treaty

"The objective of this study is to assess whether the INF treaty continues to serve America national interests or whether adherence unduly constrains the ability of the United States to effectively respond to emerging security threats arising from the proliferation of intermediate-range missile systems."



"In order to develop and deploy a new generation of land-based intermediate-range ballistic missiles, the United States would have to withdraw from the INF Treaty.."

[Don1]

Yuteman fi yuh likkle foofool intanet search nuh amount tuh nutten. Yuh nuh ave nuh pedigree inna dis suh kip qiat. Mi ave dis subjek covered fi years

If yuh waan dispute di man dem report tek dat up wid dem... ah nuh mi write it

[Muadib]

Yuh haffi deal with the Rand Corporation report.. what you have posted is nonsense since the USA cannot presently develop 'similar capabilities' based on existing treaties..

Once again Donzero... this is not technological superiority.. China is leveraging a loophole to produce a certain weapon that the USA is currently handcuffed to produce..

What you are demonstrating is that a little knowledge is a bad thing.. especially a little knowledge in the absence of the ability to apply critical thinking..

[Willi]

Di whole ah unno have a lot to learn about how the world really works.

Most here are very clueless. Where is ShattaCleve?

[Sir X]

Just curious how many years before the chinese GDP over takes the USA ? I see dem ave all di trade routes sown up.

[Don1]

This is not a subject you study ... consequently your yappin based on some quick internet search is not worth any consideration

You may take that yappin to the authors of the study...I doubt it but they may find you amusing

[Don1]

I cannot assist an ignoramus who is determined to remain ignorant at all costs. Take your petty concerns to the authors of the research paper presented if you wish to query their conclusions

In short the PRC's expanding aerospace capabilities are influencing the development of similar capabilities in other defense establishments including the United States

China's successes in designing, developing and producing the world's largest and most sophisticated arsenal of medium and intermediate range of ballistic missiles create a demand for similar capabilities around the world.
__________________

[Muadib]

Stop being obutse.

Chinese IRBM technology is not superior to US.... nothing you have presented states this.

Proliferation of a particular range missile does not speak to technology superiority..

Yuh have sense ?

Try a different approach.. I have ready the report that specifically addresses this IRBM issue in the Asia-Pacific region and it is has nothing to do with Technology superiority.. USA and Russia are under a treaty.. China is not..

Tip: Proliferation and Technology are different concepts..

[Muadib]

Donzero.. your failed attempt to demonstrate Chinese superior 'critical' aerospace technology whether now or 20 year from now is comical at best

Chinese 'superiority' in the Asia-Pacific arena in the area of IRBM proliferation is not a technology issue but a political one... specifically related to a Treaty the USA is under..

Try again... please.. this is fun !

[Don1]

=Muadib;459356]Please provide evidence that Chinese IRBM technology is superior the the USA..

Tek yuh query to di authors of the Chinese Aerospace study I provided

Please also explain how this IRBM technology qualifies as 'critical' aerospace technology... critcal to what ??

Please google the acronym IRBM

In your 'trajectory' argument you seem to forget that China is not starting from scratch.. there is a lot of 'copying' occuring.. surely you would not expect them to move at the same pace as innovation.. it is easier to copy than innovate.. the problem with copying is you are always one-step behind.. in the case of China they are MANY steps behind..

Tell dat to Lockheed Martin afta di Chiney dem tief ALL the schematics for the F-35 which the entire US air forces will depend on for the next 40 years den di Chiney dem ah test fi dem version same time wid di US